Verdict still out on the PGA Tour's new FedEx Cup format

It's complicated. It's confusing. And it could take years of different approaches and careful attention before anybody can really figure it out.

All that would make it golf, of course. Or at least the new PGA Tour golf under the FedEx Cup format that was unveiled this week.

The future of the professional game is supposed to look a lot like the history of others, with a year-end playoff system determining a season champion beginning in 2007. And tour officials were hoping to trigger excitement for that postseason when they announced details of the four-week series of events in which qualified players will compete for a $35 million total purse that includes a $10 million first prize.

Actually, they generated just as many questions.

The FedEx Cup is an interesting concept, one that could transform what is now an invisible part of the golf season into its most important time. The four playoff events will start two weeks after the PGA Championship and eliminate players from the overall title each tournament, although they will be able to keep competing for the postseason's weekly $7 million purses.

But it is also imperfect, and not only because the system seems more like a money-grab than a meaningful playoff.

The system also trivializes the regular season by allowing somebody to earn twice as much with one hot month as the game's best player did over 33 solid weeks. And it will allow 144 players to compete for the championship, which is just too many. If you've finished 144th in any sport, you don't deserve to make the playoffs.

As with any change in professional sports, there are good points and bad points about the FedEx Cup as it has been presented. And we won't know all of them until after a few years of trial, error and correction, all of which is inevitable.

But we can see a few already:

Good: The $10 million winner's share creates instant intrigue and will be a reason to watch early on.

Bad: If all they're playing for is money in these events, interest could fade quickly. Careers will continue to be measured by major championships, not earnings. And not FedEx titles, either.

Good: It strengthens the back end of the tour schedule, increasing interest in events that have long served as golf's version of mop-up relievers.

Bad: It is one more hit for non-major, non-World Golf Championships and now non-playoff events such as the Verizon Heritage. Once considered a second-tier event behind the majors, the area tour stop has now been reduced to the fourth tier and could see an impact on the quality of its field as a result.

Good: It might become more likely that the tour's top-ranked players will play later in the season when they are usually resting. Because even to somebody who wins $5 million in a season, $10 million is a lot of money.

Bad: There's no guarantee that Tiger Woods or Phil Mickelson, who both campaigned for a shorter season as recently as last year, will extend their set schedules by playing four straight weeks in September. Besides, once it appears likely they'll finish out of the top five in the FedEx standings, when the payoff drops from millions to thousands, the game's top stars will likely be headed back into hibernation.

Good: It's something new in an old game, which should count for something.

Bad: The convoluted points system will make it more difficult for fans to follow golf than when the money list was the season's primary ranking. Everybody understood how much a dollar was worth. But points are arbitrary, especially when the number awarded changes throughout the season.

Good: The toughest tournaments to win, the major championships, will receive elevated importance, earning players more points for high finishes.

Bad: Tour headquarters conveniently placed The Players Championship on the same level as the majors, which it isn't.

For now, no one really knows what the FedEx Cup will be, which makes it hard to determine whether it's really good or bad for the game.